Developing Suggestions

Developing Suggestions

This section is for presenting and reviewing suggestions which have not yet been submitted and are still being worked on.

Nothing on this page will be archived.

Further Discussion

• Discussion concerning this page takes place here.
• Discussion concerning the suggestions system in general, including policies about it, takes place here.

Please Read Before Posting

• Be sure to check The Frequently Suggested List and the Suggestions Dos and Do Nots before you post your idea. You can read about many ideas that have been suggested already, which users should be aware of before posting what could be a dupe: a duplicate of an existing suggestion. These include Machine Guns and Sniper Rifles.
• Users should be aware that page is discussion oriented. Other users are free to express their own point of view and are not required to be neutral.
• If you decide not to take your suggestion to voting, please remove it from this page to avoid clutter.
• It is recommended that users spend some time familiarizing themselves with this page before posting their own suggestions.
• After new game updates, users are requested to allow time for the game and community to adjust to these changes before suggesting alterations.

How To Make a Suggestion

Adding a New Suggestion

• Copy the code in the box below.
• Click here to begin editing. This is the same as clicking the [edit] link to the right of the Suggestions header.

• Paste the copied text above the other suggestions, right under the heading.
• Substitute the text in RED CAPITALS with the details of your suggestion.

{{subst:DevelopingSuggestion
|time=~~~~
|name=SUGGESTION NAME
|type=TYPE HERE
|scope=SCOPE HERE
|description=DESCRIPTION HERE
}}

• Name - Give the suggestion a short but descriptive name.
• Type is the nature of the suggestion, such as a new class, skill change, balance change, etc. Basically: What is it? and Is it new, or a change?
• Scope is who or what the suggestion affects. Typically survivors or zombies (or both), but occasionally Malton, the game interface or something else.
• Description should be a full explanation of your suggestion. Include information like flavor text, search odds, hit percentages, etc, as appropriate. Unless you are as yet unsure of the exact details behind the suggestion, try not to leave out anything important. Check your spelling and grammar.

Cycling Suggestions

• Suggestions with no new discussion in the past two days should be given a warning notice. This can be done by adding {{SDW|date}} at the top of the discussion section, where date is the day the suggestion will be removed.
• Suggestions with no new discussion in the past week may be removed.
• If you are adding a comment to a suggestion that has the warning template please remove the {{SDW|date}} at the top of the discussion section to show that there is still ongoing discussion.

This page is prone to breaking when the page gets too long, so sometimes suggestions still under discussion will be moved to the Overflow page, so the discussion can continue.

Please add new suggestions to the top of the list

---

Suggestions

Expert Skills v0.1

Timestamp: Devorac 21:37, 29 April 2010 (BST)

Type: New Skills

Scope: Everyone banging their heads against the granite ceiling

Description: Most everyone knows that the game burnout hits at level 41 (43 for zombies) when all skills have been earned, personally I think there should be more to work towards, (other than the tic-tac-toe of defending/destroying suburbs and buildings in the war against zombies/harmanz) a bit more to achieve. Unfortunately there are numerous problems with introducing any new skills into the game, the biggest goes something like this: "All the old players will suddenly get a buff out of nowhere.". That concern is quite legitimate, and previous means of circumventing it (reducing everyone who has 41-43 levels XP to zero, setting an XP ceiling) have been met with hostility and usually something involving EP size. This brings us to my proposal... Expert Skills, or proficiency, whatever you want to call it. What this means is that for most actions there is an additional skill that cannot be purchased with XP, it must be earned through repetition. These are skills for people who do what they do really well, you won't get these for blowing two lvl 1 zombies in half with a shotgun (120 XP) or healing 5 10HP lvl 1 survivors back to full health (100-200XP, 20-40 FAKs). For instance I think that to achieve an expert skill level with FAKs you should have to use about 2200 of them. Yes, twenty-two-hundred. Work out the AP math of that and it is two solid months of AP usage. Two solid months doing nothing but FAK people. Yeah that's a lot but I want these skills to be really cool things that you can be proud of, not just milestones. On the skill tree theses would show up as a third area after zombie skills labeled Expert Skills. The skills themselves are cool things that you will be happy to have, but the won't break the game. This is a current list of all the expert skills, I'll try to keep it as balanced between zombie and survivor skills as I can. Survivor (Many More Coming) Frugal Doctor (0/2200 First-Aid Kits Administered) Not yet Achieved 5% chance that a FAK will not be used up when healing a patient. Waste Not, Want Not. Junkyard Jackal (2543/2200 Hits with Improvised Weapons) Achieved! +10% chance to hit with all improvised weapons 5% chance to deal +1 damage when striking with improvised weapons as well. I don't know what this is, but I bet it'll hurt when it hits you. Toughness (2349/6000 Damage taken as a Survivor) Not yet Achieved 5% To take only half normal damage when attacked, rounded up. Applied after Flack jacket where applicable. I'd be lying if I said this didn't sting like all get out. Doorman (42/3000 Barricade levels lowered or raised.) Not Yet achieved +5% chance to successfully raise barricades when building. +5% chance to lower barricades on strike. Strength comes from the back and legs, use your shoulders on the big stuff and you'll just torque something Lumberjack (1438/3000 Hits with an Axe) Not Yet Achieved +5% chance to hit with Fire Axe 10% chance to not use an AP on a miss. You lose yourself in the Rhythm after a while; Raise, chop, recover, raise, chop, recover, raise... Zombie (Many More Coming) Masticate (0/2200 Survivors Bitten) Not yet Achieved* Extra 10% Increase to Zombie Bite accuracy when gripping target. 15% chance that the zombie will not use an AP when missing a bite on a gripped target. OMNOMNOMNOMNOMNOMNOMNOMNOMNOM Iron Grasp (0/2200 Survivors Gripped**) Not Yet Achieved 5% extra accuracy bonus when using tangling grasp. 5% Reduced chance for a survivor to slip grasp. Oh God I think he's got me, oh sh- *crunch* Scar Tissue (281/9000 Damage taken as a Zombie) Not Yet Achieved HP Maximum as a Zombie raised by an additional 10 points. Stacks with body-building, or rotting flesh. Goddamnit! These bitches just won't die! Destructive Intent (4/2200 Barricade levels lowered as a zombie) Not Yet Achieved 10% chance to lower barricade levels by an extra point on a successful strike. Did you hear someth- AUGHH! Hunter's Instinct (15/1500 Scent Trails Activated) Not yet achieved Zombie gets a +1 Damage on the last Character to attack it. +10% to hit bonus when attacking the last survivor to attack it. Word of advice boy, Don't start what you can't finish... These bastards get pretty angry Additionally I'm thinking of adding a single additional special expert skill for each class to make things a bit more unique. Example: Battlefield Surgery Required Class: Medic Pre-requisite Expert Skill: Frugal Doctor The Character can perform surgery everywhere except in dark buildings. Bite down on this... try to relax. These skills are hidden as a second tier skill underneath their pre-requisite expert skill, effectively hiding them until the first tier expert skill is earned. Now I'm thinking that this extra skill is automatically given once you earn it's pre-requisite, after all there is only one per character class and it is meant to amplify your base class. I*This may seem over-powered and it may indeed replace grasp, but I really think the Uber zombies should be, well Uber. I**Counts each time you re-grip, crushes don't count. Okay. thoughts?

Discussion (Expert Skills)

The example skill you gave is incredibly overpowered.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 21:56, 29 April 2010 (BST)

5 every 50? I had originally considered making it 5% but 2-3 additional uses every 50 FAKS seemed a little low for something you've probably spent a year working for. -Devorac 22:12, 29 April 2010 (BST)

A 10% chance of saving a FAK essentially translates into similar savings as a 10% higher search rate for FAKs, on average. It didn't seem overpowered to me until I put it in those terms. I do like the idea though. There's also the possibility of making class-specific skills at the very high end, which might take measures such as the one you propose here to gain. —Aichon— 22:18, 29 April 2010 (BST)

Fair point, finding a FAK takes about 3 AP at least (For me) so having an additional 5 would translate to 15 additional AP. Alright lowered to 5%, still noticeable and helpful but taken down a notch. -Devorac 22:22, 29 April 2010 (BST)

I like the idea, particularly the concept of earning these expert skills through repetition vs. XP. Develop it some more! =D --Maverick ^{Talk - OBR 404} 23:16, 29 April 2010 (BST)

So many people either stop playing or just start a new character that I can only see good things from a well balanced development of this idea... --Honestmistake 00:00, 30 April 2010 (BST)

UPDATED -Devorac 03:11, 30 April 2010 (BST) Okay, going to let the new skills get flamed into balance before I add more. -Devorac 03:36, 30 April 2010 (BST)

Clamber is quite a bit overpowered. Some of the others are overpowered, but not in game-breaking ways. Clamber really needs toning down though, maybe killing. Otherwise it'd mean 28ap saved every time a zombie entered a building. —Aichon— 03:47, 30 April 2010 (BST)

Sorry, I was in a rush. Clamber reduced to loosely then? That's 4 AP saved on average. -Devorac 03:59, 30 April 2010 (BST)

Doorman seems like an awkward survivor skill since survivors do not often need to lower barricades. I still think it's great for survivors looking to remove piñatas, but 20% might be a bit high as well. --Maverick ^{Talk - OBR 404} 07:29, 30 April 2010 (BST)

I like these ideas, however all of the skills should be reduced in power. Nothing should provide any more than a 5% buff. As long as all the skills are dealing in percentages rather than additional HP, etc, then they could be added to the game without breaking anything while still providing players with bragging rights and a tiny little boost to their playing experience.--_GANG Giles Sednik _CAPD 08:43, 30 April 2010 (BST)

Very Strongly Agreed. I think the idea is great but the skills do need work.--V darkstar 17:10, 30 April 2010 (BST)

Skills Re-worked and suggestion Re-Formatted for Easy reading

Survivor Skills.

1. Frugal Doctor: Unchanged. I think that one is fairly well finalized.
2. Junkyard Jackal: Slight Change. Extra Damage chance reduced to 5%.
3. Toughness: Changed. Now it is a 50% damage reduction 5% of the time.
4. Doorman: Changed. Now requires 3000, can be gained through barricading as well as de-cading. Bonuses changed to fit.
5. Lumber jack: Slight Change. Now it is a 10% chance to not use an AP only on a miss.

Zombie Skills.

1. Masticate: Slight Change. Chance to not use an AP reduced to 15% and only applied on a miss.
2. Iron Grip: Re-Written for clarity. 15% bonus to the chance of keeping a survivor successfully held reduced to 5%.
3. Scar tissue: Difficulty increased 50%.
4. Clamber: Killed, Renamed, Reborn.
5. Hunters Instinct: Unchanged.

Class skills

1. Battlefield surgery: Unchanged. So simple and so perfect for the class... Probably won't change this one.

Thanks for the feedback, keep it coming! -Devorac 17:18, 30 April 2010 (BST)

---

Windows shading

Timestamp: Girobu 09:14, 29 April 2010 (BST)

Type: New mechanics

Scope: all

Description: When a building is powered, the light is observable from the street. It attractss zombies and PKers to lit buildings, and makes non-lit ones a little bit safer. But what if we'd have ability to shade the windows with newspapers? The idea is - if you have certain amount of newspapers (different for different building types), you can shade the windows for cost 1 AP per newspaper (NO partial shading!). When building is shaded, it looks like unpowered one from the street, even when powered. When zombie enters the building, he/she can destroy shading for one succesful attack (I assume, that newspapers are not very strong) - there is an option in attacked things list - "shading". Variants: No need to newspapers, just some AP (let's say 5-20 for different bildings) to shade windows ("you shade the windows with some duct tape"), and the same mechanics to remove shading (one successful attack to shading). But there is more fun with newspapers (and you need pay AP's to find them).

Discussion (Windows shading)

The added danger is the balance for the huge search advantage a generator gives. No making them invisible. If you don't want to pay the price, smash the generator yourself -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 09:18 29 April 2010 (BST)

It makes non-lit building more dangerous, so the price is paid. Plus it paid by amount of AP required to shade building, and just 1-2 to fully deshade it. --Girobu 09:27, 29 April 2010 (BST)

The danger is displaced or spread around from valuable locations to less valuable locations. Still an advantage. —Aichon— 09:32, 29 April 2010 (BST)

I think, balance kept (there are advantages and disadvantages for both sides) - and the strategy becomes more interesting for both parties. --Girobu 11:29, 29 April 2010 (BST)

Aichon and Boxy really nailed this one on the head. The light of the genny is the trade-off, AND you're trying to make a RP item (newspaper) useful at the same time. If you want your genny to stay hidden, put it in a ruined building. --Maverick ^{Talk - OBR 404} 10:14, 29 April 2010 (BST)

Orly? 14:40, 29 April 2010 (BST)

Plus this will really annoy those zombies in Perma Death Cities, searching through the ruins for that single lit building. Oh! and if the genny was destroyed whilst the windows were covered, would the building become Dark? --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 10:19, 29 April 2010 (BST)

Yes, it's good idea (making them dark). And if you want to find something, you must de-shade it. Price paid? :) --Girobu 10:50, 29 April 2010 (BST)

Bad idea. We'd see a lot of newspaper-darkened non-TRPs just to have a safe sleep place, while zombies have no way to dismantle them by ripping away the paper or setting up a gennie. --Spiderzed 14:36, 29 April 2010 (BST)

Now you can cade and power the whole suburb just to have a safe sleep place while zombies have no way... you know. Does it ruin the game? I want just to have another strategy. And - shading is expensive, de-shading is cheap - to keep the balance. --Girobu 15:39, 29 April 2010 (BST)

As others have already said, you can't have your cake and eat it too. If you can't live with being attacked in a lit resource building, destroy the genny, or even smarter yet, go to the TRP only to stock up and then sleep somewhere safer. But don't go and pester Kevan to change the game just because you can't be bothered to endure a trade-off that has been long established in UD, and that most survivor players have learned to deal with. --Spiderzed 14:36, 29 April 2010 (BST)

No, it isn't. Addition of such possibility won't give you a free cookie, because everyone will know about it, so there is no way to be safe in TRP like in dark bank today. I'd say, there will be no safe dark banks with this suggestion implemented. --Girobu 15:34, 29 April 2010 (BST)

I didn't see anything in your suggestion that would make dark banks more dangerous. But the criticism brought up by others here is warranted. This would really mess up the game for feral zombies and cause more of them to stop playing. When there aren't any feeding groans, attacking lit buildings is one of the best ways for ferals to try and find a snack. Zombies already have to guess at where there prey is, since they can't see inside the buildings. The newspaper trick would further conceal the presence of survivors all across Malton almost overnight, making the game more difficult and frustrating for all zombies.--_GANG Giles Sednik _CAPD 07:59, 30 April 2010 (BST)

---

Zombies > Barricades (When Inside)

Timestamp: Maverick Talk - OBR 404 06:26, 29 April 2010 (BST)

Type: Mechanics change

Scope: Seiges & zombies looking for bra!ns

Description: Barricades are a zombies worst enemy, but why should it be just as hard when the zombie is INSIDE the building? One would think that would make it far easier to remove the things blocking the way in so those pesky harmans can't just throw up barricades behind you and separate you from all your hungry friends. Simply put, I am suggesting a change to the attack percentages for zombies attacking barricades from INSIDE a building. This is meant to go along with Survivor:Zombie Interference Negation. When inside a building the base chance for a zombie to destroy a level of barricade is 70%. This would be 80% with Vigor Mortis or 95% with Death Grip. Hence, MUCH easier to destroy cades from the inside, although still that small 5% chance of failure.

Discussion (Zombies > Barricades (When Inside))

Doesn't being inside already give everyone a small boost? Even if not, your numbers are insane. ~25 to 95?--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 07:18, 29 April 2010 (BST)

Yes, apparently it does already give a small boost... but that boost is insanely underpowered (so much so that you cant tell the difference). It really could do with an increase -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 09:26 29 April 2010 (BST)

The problem with this is that it only makes sense if survivors get a similar boost and that would make it too easy to overcade during an attack and then take em back down to allow entry. Also, as Yonnua says, those numbers are insanely high. --Honestmistake 08:47, 29 April 2010 (BST)

+1 --Girobu 08:51, 29 April 2010 (BST)

I don't see why it makes sense to offer the same to survivors. Survivors shouldn't be taking down barricades. Zombies should be. If you want to make the realism argument, I'll counter with the "let's go with what's best for the game and what's fun" argument. For a zombie on the inside, they can attack barricades at points where they're not fortified against attack, enabling them to take them down faster. As boxy said, it needs a buff. Badly. 95% is a bit high, I think, but bumping it up closer to 50-75% seems reasonable to me. —Aichon— 09:47, 29 April 2010 (BST)

The numbers are insanely high for a reason. As I said, this suggestion is meant as a compliment to the one below. Besides, are you telling me that it shouldn't be significantly easier to remove barricades from the inside? As a stand-alone, all I really see this suggestion doing is offering up a new tactics for trans-mortal zombies and dealth cultists in siege situations because right now zeds have nothing to gain by attacking 'cades from the inside of a building. This would provide a new incentive (incredibly AP efficient) and possibly even suggest some new tactics for both survivors and zombies. --Maverick ^{Talk - OBR 404} 09:41, 29 April 2010 (BST)

No linking suggestions.--Pesatyel 04:43, 30 April 2010 (BST)

There is a guideline about not making compound or multi-part suggestions, but nothing about paired suggestions. Besides, analyze each for what they're worth. They do work best together, but each stands on its own just fine. —Aichon— 06:28, 30 April 2010 (BST)

Do not reference other suggestions not already implemented in the game. :( --Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 08:28, 30 April 2010 (BST)

I stand corrected (thanks, incidentally; I don't like continuing in my ignorance whenever possible). Still, I think they stand alone just fine, as I said. —Aichon— 08:48, 30 April 2010 (BST)

The problem is that the below suggestion does the exact opposite of what Kevan has been trying to do. And it's retarded. --VVV ^RPMBG 05:41, 30 April 2010 (BST)

You're wrong on both counts, and your casual dismissal of an elegant solution does not speak well of you. Barricades are used to balance out the AP spent by zombies, otherwise survivors would be overrun. If zombies are inside buildings though, that's a different matter entirely, and the barricades are now serving a different purpose. Forcing the survivors to split their attention more between putting up new barricades and killing zombies on the inside is good, since it creates more interesting gameplay. Ross' suggestion covers that entire idea in an elegant and simple manner. DIsmissing it offhand with such a rude comment is, well, rude. I know this page has a lot of vitriol on it, but I have a lot more respect for someone who puts up a strongly worded counter-argument than I do for someone who offers a meritless dismissal of a good idea any day. —Aichon— 06:28, 30 April 2010 (BST)

I'm sorry, is this the five minute argument or the full half hour? --VVV ^RPMBG 07:57, 30 April 2010 (BST)

Almost everything with me is the half hour version vs. the five minute version, since I'm always long-winded, but three lines does not a half hour of reading make, and there's no argument here. Merely a pointing out of your incorrectness. :) —Aichon— 08:02, 30 April 2010 (BST)

Regardless of the other suggestion below, I'd say make this a standalone change. Decading from inside should be easier than outside. Here's a crazy alternative. Attacks inside building on barricades are not subject to the 50% decrease in accuracy normally associated with barricade attacks. for everyone. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 09:56, 29 April 2010 (BST)

I like the simpleness of Ross' suggestion. If you want to go with anything, go with this one. --Spiderzed 14:40, 29 April 2010 (BST)

+1 14:49, 29 April 2010 (BST)

Simplistic, not bad.--Pesatyel 04:43, 30 April 2010 (BST)

Not simplistic. Simple. There's a big difference. And yes, it's not a bad idea at all. I'd get behind it. —Aichon— 06:29, 30 April 2010 (BST)

+4 - Send it through. It will pass. --VVV ^RPMBG 05:41, 30 April 2010 (BST)

What about Piñatas?--Pesatyel 04:43, 30 April 2010 (BST)

It would aply to buildings regardless of ruin status. Not like any zombie smart enough to make a piñata would be dumb enough to open it. --VVV ^RPMBG 05:41, 30 April 2010 (BST)

Sometimes zombies parachute into heavily barricaded buildings, killing survivors before ruining them. Any survivors that were killed inside can stand up as zombies inside (because zombies can't dump bodies) and decade -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 09:39 30 April 2010 (BST)

I don't like this at all. The biggest reason being that it would make parachuting ridiculously overpowered, as it would be used to instantly remove any barricades. But I can think of a few other problems too.
Right now, when a zombie gets into a building they can do plenty of damage by eating brains and smashing generators. Currently, if a lone zed feels like being altruistic and de-barricading, then they are making a tactical decision to spend their AP helping others, rather than taking the immediate personal payoff of eating brains. So, in a way, this suggestion would be removing a tactical consideration from the game. Trade-offs are good for the game, because they offer the opportunity to make meaningful decisions, right?
With this suggestion, there's no trade off. So if I'm a zombie in a building and the survivors decide to erect barricades around me, I just bring the barricades down and then start eating brains. Also, this would basically mean that 1 or 2 standing zombies in a building would signal the end game of a siege, rather than a manageable set back, which would in turn make sieges less possible and therefore discourage prolonged conflicts between zombies and survivors and in turn move the game farther away from zombies vs survivors.
However, zombies getting barricaded into buildings is really only an occasional situation. Most of the time, when a zombie breaks in, there are no cades up and they just AP out eating brains. What this really is, is a massive buff to parachuting. The really big problem here is that this would provide a way for 2 coordinating players (or 1 zerger) to instantly remove barricades, the single most important defense that survivors have. I'd never vote for something that could have the potential to so badly cripple the game, and I can't imagine too many other survivors voting for it either.--_GANG Giles Sednik _CAPD 08:32, 30 April 2010 (BST)

Thats why I prefer mine. Simpler, and more balanced. We might even get some people decading entry points from EHB. Scary! --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 11:21, 30 April 2010 (BST)

Entry points? *Scoffs* Entry points are a myth. -Devorac 16:51, 30 April 2010 (BST)

---

Survivor:Zombie Interference Negation

Timestamp: Maverick Talk - OBR 404 06:26, 29 April 2010 (BST)

Type: Mechanics fix

Scope: Zombie interference

Description: Zombie interference and the beachhead tactic are too powerful. Where there could be tension for control of a building/mall, there is instead a kind of "lost cause" mentality when even a small number of zeds break into a building--regardless of whether there are 4 survivors or 86 survivors. This suggestion seeks to remedy that somewhat while still keeping zombie interfence and the beachhead tactic viable; this is meant to go along with Zombies > Barricades (When Inside). Zombie interference takes effect when there are two or more zombies in a building. Based on preliminary experiments, current best guess is that it hampers barricade chances by roughly 50%. I suggest that this should be less of an issue if there are sufficiently more survivors present than zombies--10 to 1, in fact. How much of a difference I am leaving up for debate, but I was thinking 15% for every 10 extra survivors with there always being a minimum of 5% zombie interference. Example: 2 zombies and 14 survivors = zombie interference functions as normal 2 zombies and 20 survivors = zombie interference is 15% less (so zombies only block barricades 35% of the time instead of 50%) 3 zombies and 40 survivors = zombie interference is 30% less (or 20% chance of z-block) 4 zombies and 86 survivors = zombie interference is 45% less (46 extra survivors, but must always be at least 5% chance of z-block) 5 zombies and 48 survivors = zombie interference functions as normal

Discussion (Survivor:Zombie Interference Negation)

In the genre, how many people hang around when a zombie breaks in to the building? Even if there are a hundred people in a mall with you, when you zombie breaks in, you flee. Currently, I think the game reflects this well.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 07:21, 29 April 2010 (BST)

Actually survivors don't flee. They cade/kill. This is the reason for beachhead. If they fled the scene then zombies would not have to keep an open door.--Dirty 08:47, 29 April 2010 (BST)

I really like this idea. Interference is currently overpowered and doesn't scale well at all with the number of humans and zombies. Having it scale appropriately would be a GREAT change for the game. —Aichon— 09:49, 29 April 2010 (BST)

Cade blocking is fine as it is now. Not all zombies act in strike teams, some of us prefer to go feral and see it already as a big success to squeeze 3 or so in before the cades are up again. There's anyway already a built-in advantage for the survivor's numerical advantage, as they can shoot down intruding zombies to make the building cadeable again. No need to bolster that further. --Spiderzed 14:44, 29 April 2010 (BST)

This. Changes based on the existence of organised zombies can't ignore the extreme difficulty of playing as a feral. 14:51, 29 April 2010 (BST)

How often does a group of 2-3 ferals break into a building with 20+ survivors though? I kept that in mind when setting up the ratio so that the focus is on organized hordes and would have as little effect on ferals as possible. --Maverick ^{Talk - OBR 404} 21:38, 29 April 2010 (BST)

I've seen that regularly, especially with timed Feral Movement tactics and/or high-profile targets as malls or fort gatehouses. If you want to leave the ferals alone and only nerf organized hordes a bit, leave the cade-blocking of lower zombie numbers alone (up to 5 or so), and nerf everything above that mark. --Spiderzed 22:27, 29 April 2010 (BST)

I think you just need to suggest a leash that can be applied to survivors only, based on a check of what percentage (50? 65?) of their last, say, 200 AP has been spent on attacking. This can be used to drag idiot trenchies to break-in sites where their bullets will actually do some good. --Mold 05:46, 30 April 2010 (BST)

I kinda like the current barricade blocking the way it is. The current situation encourages survivors to keep the barricades up at all costs in a siege, because letting zombies in has a compounding effect. I appreciate the thought you put into the percentages, but as others have pointed out, it would make things a bit more difficult for ferals.--_GANG Giles Sednik _CAPD 08:38, 30 April 2010 (BST)

---

New FAK rules

Timestamp: -- | T | BALLS! | 00:54 24 April 2010(UTC)

Type: Improvement

Scope: FAK's/Healing

Description: FAK's in this game are ridiculous. Injuries should heal slower than they are inflicted but in Urban Dead its just the opposite, they heal much faster than inflicted. FAK's are overpowered anyway even if you ignore the rest. So here are some new rules: 1 FAK heals 1 HP. First Aid Skill increases it to 1 FAK heals 2 HP. Surgery Skill increases it to 1 FAK heals 4 HP if in a powered Hospital. Cons for Survivors: Obviously takes more FAK's to heal up. Pro for Survivors: Low level players will have a lot more chance for XP gain.

Discussion (New FAK rules)

Fuck, he's alive. Also how would this affect xp gain? 01:02, 24 April 2010 (BST)

I didn't think about that. Could make it too easy to XP whore if it remained 5 per I suppose. Suggestions?--

| T | BALLS! | 01:04 24 April 2010(UTC)

XP equal to HP healed. 01:06, 24 April 2010 (BST)

Healing does need a nerf, but this makes the game less fun by increasing search time overwhelmingly. I think and appropriate change would be that there is a limit to how much healing can be done to one player in each half hour (AP regen) period. You can still apply FAKs, but the healing wouldn't take affect until the next AP tick. This would mean that survivors couldn't heal quicker than a zombie can attack. Nothing lamer than watching the survivor you are attacking miraculously gain full health in the time it takes you to claw at him a couple of times -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 01:09 24 April 2010 (BST)

I agree completely. Healing is ridiculously overpowered. Dropping the HP healed isn't the answer, but this would work great. No added 'omg, more searching!?! so boring!' but the removal of 'Kill the medic, not the heavy!'

Also here are HealthyDude (60_HP), HealingDude (34+15_HP), and HurtDude (46_HP) --VVV ^RPMBG 04:51, 24 April 2010 (BST)

My original idea was along these lines but I thought people would get all K.I.S.S. on me. Then there is the healing someone who already has their heal for the half hour and how that works. I guess there could be a new color for that. One fix for doing it my way would be to increase search rates for FAK's so they are easier to find. I like that better because it limits the total healing potential that a single Survivor could carry at once. Instead of a Survivor being able to carry 50 FAK's at once for max 250/500/750 possible healing potential (just looking at those number makes me sick) it would be 50/100/200. A lot more sane. Increased Search Rates would make Hospitals a great Resource Point as well! As Survivors could cycle through their FAKs like mad as long as they had patients to treat. Anything that puts more focus on the "lesser Resource Points" over those Malls is a plus in my book.--

| T | BALLS! | 08:10 24 April 2010(UTC)

I could certainly get behind VVV's idea of only 5 HP-worth of healing getting applied every AP tick, as long as you could still apply multiple FAKs to the same player (they just wouldn't take effect right away). So now I suppose I'll just wait and see if that idea ever shows its face for voting... --Maverick ^{Talk - OBR 404} 06:38, 28 April 2010 (BST)

For further development, I think it's worth taking to voting, myself -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 16:26 28 April 2010 (BST)

If I see it in voting, it'll have my vote. --Maverick ^{Talk - OBR 404} 06:13, 29 April 2010 (BST)

Or you could make the FAKs simular to a fuel can, in that you find 1 that weighs a shit load, the number of 5/10/15HP heals it deals are limited to the amount of medical equipment inside the kit. keep the search rates the same all over the place. i dunno, just tossing ideas out. but i agree with the basis of this suggestion.--Dirty 03:01, 24 April 2010 (BST)

That sounds cool too.--

| T | BALLS! | 08:13 24 April 2010(UTC)

How bout scotty don't! -- 

•   Timmah!  

•   Talk  

03:24, 24 April 2010 (BST)

F.A.K.K.² --Arthur Dent BIN LADEN IS DEAD!!!!! 09:24, 24 April 2010 (BST)

It changes game a little - I've just have to spend more boring time searching. --Girobu 14:09, 26 April 2010 (BST)

What if you found more at one time? Say when you search you could find 1 to 3 each search.--Pesatyel 02:08, 27 April 2010 (BST)

So what? This guy wants play zed without nerf, his next suggestion will (I think) - "New cade rules - one attack to destroy all cades around" :) --Girobu 09:44, 27 April 2010 (BST)

What?--Pesatyel 03:37, 28 April 2010 (BST)

The plain balance shift, I meant --Girobu 07:40, 28 April 2010 (BST)

Again. What? The suggestion was to reduce the healing power of an individual FAK. The main argument against it is that it means "more mindnumbing searching". While I think I like Honestmistake's idea better, as far as THIS suggestion goes, what about increasing the number of FAK you find in a search to compensate for weaker FAK themselves? Or, how about the ability to manufacture a "more powerful" FAK?--Pesatyel 04:29, 29 April 2010 (BST)

make each single FAK weaker, but easier to find? And what the reason? The first suggestion is bad, but I can, at least, understand why it's made. --Girobu 08:46, 29 April 2010 (BST)

I think that zombies healing is just a powerful. I mean 1 AP to restore 4 HP no item needed, and bodies are found everywhere. You need to keep the game balanced.--V darkstar 13:46, 27 April 2010 (BST)

I think, the FAKs shouldn't work on zombies, just because medicine doesn't cure dead. Let's write new suggestion on this? --Girobu 08:54, 29 April 2010 (BST)

How about 1 FAK heals 1HP immediately and continues healing 1 HP per AP tick until it reaches its current total (IE 5/10/15) depending on all the factors. That way the FAK still heals the same amount, it just doesn't do it instantly. --Honestmistake 21:40, 27 April 2010 (BST)

I like the idea.--Pesatyel 03:37, 28 April 2010 (BST)

You think, that AP equals to hour, ninute or so, but it's not true. AP is a single action. What you're saying is just bad. Cutting AP's for no reason makes game boring, not interesting. Boring game = less gamers= much more boring game. --Girobu 07:39, 28 April 2010 (BST)

You obviously don't understand, read it carefully and you might realize that I am not suggesting that using the FAK cost more.... just that each tickover that restores an AP would also restore a HP. Put simply if "total noob" uses a FAK he would no longer restore 5HP instantly, instead he would restore 1 immediately and 1 more every half hour until either the target is fully healed or the full 5 are regained (2 hours) In no way am I suggesting that "noob" needs to stay and keep clicking, just that the "patient" no longer gets the full benefit in one single lump.--Honestmistake 23:45, 28 April 2010 (BST)

Try not to say "I want FAK to work another way", but: "I want add the ***** to the game". What this change will add to the game? Nothing, as I can see. Just more AP wasting for the same result. Let's just ask Kevan to cut daily AP from 50 to 30 - the same thing. --Girobu 08:39, 29 April 2010 (BST)

OK, obviously English is not your 1st language so I will try and make this as simple as possible for you.

Currently 1AP + 1 FAK = instant heal for 5, 10 or 15 HP depending on skill and location.

My suggestion is that 1AP + 1 FAK = 5, 10 or 15 HP added over time.

That time will be measured by the AP tick. The AP tick is the mechanism that works out when your character should regain any spent AP, I am not in anyway suggesting something that would make healing cost extra AP. I am not in any way suggestiong that the healer must do anything more than he/she already does (ie click to use a FAK for 1AP) the wounded person also does not have to do anything. The server does all the additional work with no help (or interference) from the players. Is that clear?

It's perfectly clear. Please, explain, what it will add to game process? I must do 5-10-15 actions in order to heal myself before sleeping. Nice. Cool. Can't wait when it comes true. 5-15 stupid actions for just healing. Let's also add "physical exercise" (or just "do something stupid") to list of possible actions :) Finally, it comes to simple AP cut, as I've said. No beauty. --Girobu 09:26, 29 April 2010 (BST)

Dude. You wouldn't have to do 5-10-15 actions, they would happen automatically, it's just that the HP would be added over time instead of all in one hit. Just like in R/L, the wounds would take time to heal, rather than instantaneously as soon as you applied the bandage -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 09:30 29 April 2010 (BST)

Wait 5 hrs to heal 10 HP? Wait 15 hrs to full healing after revive? Please, finally, answer - what it would add to the game, besides "realism"? --Girobu 10:47, 29 April 2010 (BST)

It adds balance. Being able to fully heal another survivor in a fraction of the time it takes a zombie who is right there to kill is ridiculous. But you do make a good point about survivors coming online, having to wait for full health before venturing out. Perhaps self-applied FAK should be immune from this -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 11:02 29 April 2010 (BST)

As I can see, zombies kill survivors with good rate. And zombies almost un-killable by design. Also note, that in "real life" we do not sleep so long, but do many things doesn't implemented in game. So "real life" isn't a reason. And I'm strongly against auto-FAK - it removes some nerf from the game. And in most cases auto-FAKed survivours will act like terminators. --Girobu 11:18, 29 April 2010 (BST)

Now, what will this change? Very simply this will make it much easier for zombies to kill 'sleeping' survivors in a live fight because 1 FAK will no longer undo the work of 6 or 7 zombie AP (not to mention the break in cost!) It would also open the way to more skills as survivors who specialise in healing will want ways to tell who is already under the effect of a FAK. --Honestmistake 09:10, 29 April 2010 (BST)

I think that the first FAK applied should still heal the full amount of HP (depending on the healers skills), and only subsequent FAKs should be added over time. Stopping the bleeding, and giving medication will improve the health immediately, followed by a slow healing process -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 10:10 29 April 2010 (BST)

Actually I was thinking that A FAK should heal 1point without skill, 2points with skill and 3points with skill and power then 2 hours (4AP ticks) later the system should add the appropriate outstanding amount (4/8/12) depending on the current status (ie power and your current health) that gives a neater system but still slows the healing rate to a manageable level. --Honestmistake 16:52, 29 April 2010 (BST)

The point has been made before that a single Action Point represents a single action - building a barricade, or walking from one building to another would obviously take more time than whipping out a newspaper and slapping someone in the face with it. The action point spent using the FAK represents the time it takes to crack that bad boy open and apply some magical healing salve. A tendency towards realism in a game like this makes it less fun for everyone - especially those trenchies who run around with ten shotguns stuffed in the waistand of their trousers! Sage|Carr ^Cobra 21:44, 27 April 2010 (BST)

I'm not sure what your point is exactly. Did you read the suggestion?--Pesatyel 03:37, 28 April 2010 (BST)

Too strong of a nerf. FAKs go pretty quick as it is. I can't imagine rebuilding a suburb or maintaining a conflict against any kind of zombie presence if it took 8 or 9 FAKs to fully restore 1 survivor. This would hasten the end of the game as we know it.--_GANG Giles Sednik _CAPD 12:32, 28 April 2010 (BST)

Thats the point, you should not be able to cure 300HP in one day.... that gives you the advantage, that makes taken a suburb into zombie hands almost impossible.--Dirty 18:39, 28 April 2010 (BST)

Look at the map - good zombie players take suburbs, bad players - not, no matter how FAKs work. --Girobu 08:48, 29 April 2010 (BST)

• coughridleybankcough* Seriously, this game isn't about realism. I like Honestmistake's idea best here, that way survivors lose their advantage of healing in live combat (while zombies still have a chance of boosting health with a successful bite), and the FAK does not become horribly useless. Seriously, 1 HP? That makes a FAK beer with infection healing. --Enigma^talk 01:31, 29 April 2010 (BST)

Here is a ricola, now keep in mind the massive amount of zombies in ridleybank. There is a reason it is red. It is the home to the largest zombie group in malton. Even then its not hard to stay alive in ridley bank when you have 40 faks. feeling better now? --Dirty 04:56, 29 April 2010 (BST)

---

Gravedigger

Timestamp: Matias Gray 20:37, 21 April 2010 (BST)

Type: new survial skill

Scope: survials on dead bodies

Description: I think the game needs an opportunity to bury bodies in the ground, cemeteries and flowerbeds. Dragging them (after all, zombies can) up from the ground, burying them with a shovel, spending 10 AP on undigging.(instead 20) Shovels can be found in cemeteries (2%) and malls (5%). Moving the body to a neighboring cell - 5 AP

Discussion (Gravedigger)

How would Ankle Grab affect this? 20 AP, as I am sure you are aware, is almost half of the maximum capacity. This would seriously impede someone's ability to perform - especially a feral. -- Rahrah is not too happy about another dead lexicon. 20:46, 21 April 2010 (BST)

20 ap becouse survial spend some ap to drag the body to cemestry and to bury.

20 ap becouse survials spend 20 ap when revive (use syringe and stand up)

but, ok, 10 ap is fine too.--Matias Gray 20:56, 21 April 2010 (BST)

Massively unnecessary and overpowered.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 21:04, 21 April 2010 (BST)

Headshot is bad enough as it is. I want no armies of shovel-toting trenchies in front of gatehouses who dig me in additionally, just to grieve me. --Spiderzed 21:18, 21 April 2010 (BST)

+5AP for standing up instead of 10AP digging out.good idea in fact.--Ed Readman 21:19, 21 April 2010 (BST)

This influence only on really ded bodies- like headshot, but requires more ap and give more fun&roleplay--Matias Gray 21:21, 21 April 2010 (BST)

*less fun.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 22:17, 21 April 2010 (BST)

I think, this ability must work like Headshot skill: Zombie gets +5 AP penalty to the revive cost. And body transportation cost must be lowered, 2 AP per move. Marten265 21:26, 21 April 2010 (BST)

You can already dump our bodies out of buildings, and recade to ehb at the cost of about 30ap. now you want to bury us. i dont dig --Dirty 22:54, 21 April 2010 (BST)

No dragging bodies to new locations, even without the burying them bullshite. If I get killed, and thrown out of a building, I should be able to lie there until I choose to stand up -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 09:21 22 April 2010 (BST)

When you're dead, you should not be able anything :) --Girobu 15:59, 23 April 2010 (BST)

Not dead... undead :p -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 01:11 24 April 2010 (BST)

Massive tool for griefing. Im a pker, I head shot your character, then bury him outside. without ankle grab thats a 20ap penalty. All this does is further hurt new players. The game should be more fun, not less.--Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 09:24, 22 April 2010 (BST)

+1 22:58, 23 April 2010 (BST)

Do you realise how long it takes to dig a grave in real life? In a locked down city crawling with zombies, how many people are going to spend that amount of time in the wide open digging graves? No-one, because it's just a slow and painful suicide. Chief Seagull squawk ^{don't mess with the Seagull!} 09:27, 22 April 2010 (BST)

As mentioned above, it's bad enough already with headshot. - User:Whitehouse 13:44, 22 April 2010 (BST)

It's good, especially body dragging must add more fun! And gives survs a way to defeat zombs. Yes-yes-yes! --Girobu 15:56, 23 April 2010 (BST)

I'm a pro-survivor and I think this way over powered. I do wish there was a better way to get rid of zombies rather than spending 20 AP to reduce their AP by 6, but this is to much.--V darkstar 17:07, 23 April 2010 (BST)

1. What the hell is a "Survial" and why are they "on dead bodies". 2. Please for the love of God/hookers/Bacon/country/whatever-the-hell-floats-your-boat write you suggestion more clearly. The first time I went through it I thought you were saying that the survivors could bury themselves in the ground and have zombies dig them up for 10-20 AP. 3. As has been said this is massively overpowered, we do not need more mechanics to hurt new zombies. Playing a zombie char for the first time is akin to bashing your head into a brick wall for a while, even with experience it is extremely unpleasant until you get a few basic skills. Screwing them over will not make the game more fun. -Devorac 17:45, 23 April 2010 (BST)

I mean that it will be possible buried not only zombies, but but also survivors(who just revived) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Matias_Gray (talk • contribs) at an unknown time.

I think this is a great idea. I always dreamed to bury the deceased's body deep in the soil can not harm me or my ilk again. Fortunately, this feature is that I am very hurt again a buffer between the living and the dead. Suggestions continue to make these types.--_GANG Giles Sednik _CAPD 23:34, 24 April 2010 (BST)

You sir are a sarcastic twat :) --Honestmistake 01:55, 25 April 2010 (BST)

---

Scent Hunt

Timestamp: Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 18:15, 20 April 2010 (BST)

Type: Skill Change

Scope: Zombies

Description: Currently, Scent Blood and Scent Trail are two seperate skills, both subskills of Scent Fear. this suggestion would propose merging them in to one skill, Scent Hunt. Details below. Current System: Scent Fear: Scent Blood (The HP values and infection status of nearby survivors are displayed next to their name.) Scent Trail (Zombie is able to sense the new positions of survivors it's had recent contact with.) Each costs 100XP. I'm proposing that instead of 2 skills, they become one zombie skill, in the same position. Although both offer a significant tactical advantage, I don't consider that they give enough of an advantage to warrant costing 100 additional XP. As such, I'd suggest that they are joined, as Scent Hunt, giving both skills for only 100XP. Everybody with both would now only have the one skill, and would be refunded 100XP. Everybody with one would now have the full skill, and would not recieve a refund. Everybody without either skill would be unaffected. Thoughts?

Discussion (Scent Hunt)

So, for the cost of one skill, we not only get the equivalent of a super-Diagnosis skill (since it can track infections too), but we also get a homing device? I think you can see where I'm going with this. I think we already get our money's worth on those two skills as it is. —Aichon— 19:18, 20 April 2010 (BST)

Have you ever used Scent Trail?--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 19:19, 20 April 2010 (BST)

Yep. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 19:39, 20 April 2010 (BST)

Would you say it's worth spending an additional 100 experience on?--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 19:43, 20 April 2010 (BST)

Yes. Say you're an organised horde, perhaps maintaining a ruin, if a group of survivors were trying to evict you over a few days, you would have multiple sources of information telling you exactly where they were holing up each day. Then you could organise a timed strike and eat them all. Or if you were in a perma death city, its an absolute must have. Those survivors in Borehamwood don't even go near a zombie unless they know they can kill it. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 19:56, 20 April 2010 (BST)

Excellent point on the death cities. I guess I didn't consider the co-ordinated strike side of it because I feral as a zombie.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 20:12, 20 April 2010 (BST)

As Ross said, yep. While we don't do it often, there have been times that I've been DNA Extracted on my MOB alt and have been able to point out the building for our strike team to hit when we get done with our scheduled target for the day. Other times, I've followed the trail and found a building that was already opened up by the MOB's feral cloud. There's nothing quite so satisfying as demanding your DNA back in zombie speak, before eating the survivor's brains. —Aichon— 20:21, 20 April 2010 (BST)

As ross and aichon. I just don't think putting the two skills together would be such a good idea. It feels slightly off balance (powerwise) to have them roleed up into one skill. but I get your drift. --Jack Kolt ^Talk|Chars 02:32, 21 April 2010 (BST)

It's not really worth quibbling over how many XP peripheral skills cost; such skills don't all need to be "worth" the XP they cost, because by the time you buy them, you are3 earning XP pretty quickly. By peripheral skills, I mean ones that don't directly increase your ap spent / xp earned ratio. Some periphery skills act more "level padding" than anything else; even if people never use them, they still buy them!
Zombies would gain a great deal of playability from making Vigor Mortis a free skill (and giving starting zombies a new "class" skill) because they NEED Vigor Mortis to even make it to level 2. But by the time you (should be) buying scent skills above Scent Fear, you are already earning a lot of XP. Plus, as others noted, the effect of Scent Blood alone is easily worth the (by the time you buy it) low cost.  Swiers 02:52, 22 April 2010 (BST)

---

Improve Diagnosis

Timestamp: V darkstar 13:31, 20 April 2010 (BST)

Type: Skill Improvement

Scope: Evreyone

Description: We all know that you can't diagnose a survivor in a dark building, however I recently discovered that you also can't diagnose a survivor OUTSIDE a dark building. I suggest that anyone with diagnosis can see the health of a survivor outside a dark building.

Discussion (Improve Diagnosis)

Bug. - User:Whitehouse 13:45, 20 April 2010 (BST)

As Whitehouse, this is a bug regarding the tagging of locations as dark. Kevan will get to it in time. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 13:46, 20 April 2010 (BST)

yeah right...--Arthur Dent BIN LADEN IS DEAD!!!!! 14:35, 20 April 2010 (BST)

---

Caffine Pills

Timestamp: BlackDragon2026 23:35, 17 April 2010 (BST)

Type: New Item

Scope: Survivors

Description: Similar to beer or wine, except that this consumable item, found mainly in mall drug stores or police and fire stations will give an AP increase, while your health decrease slightly every time you take a pill. Each box of caffine pills can have 5 to 10 pills, and each pill, which takes no AP to digest, will increase one AP and decrease one health. Drug stores would have these for sale, while EMS personnel at fire stations and police officers on night shift would have them in their lockers.

Discussion (Caffine Pills)

My death-cultist would gladly pack some. Health degradation not just for free, but for extra AP? Amazing parachutes could be done by that... --Spiderzed 23:40, 17 April 2010 (BST)

My thoughts exactly. A pack of 5 or 10 of these, as you say, plus an infection, halves the amount of AP expended dying in a parachute. I like it but it's powerful. Gain 1 AP, lose 5 HP, doses found individually (flavour it as taking several pills at once, rather than finding individual pills), then they'd probably balance out more. I'd vote for them in a watered-down form, as I'd find great use for them. 23:44, 17 April 2010 (BST)

Could allow for massive AP usage in a single burst. Overpowered. - User:Whitehouse 23:41, 17 April 2010 (BST)

Upon use: Gain 5AP, doesn't take any to eat. The next five AP using actions: Nothing unusual. The next five AP using actions: Costs double the normal AP. It all stacks, so if you eat four pills, you get 20AP, make 20 Normal moves, and then have the hangover last for 20 moves. But of corse, it would never work, like anything that afects AP. --VVV ^RPMBG 00:23, 18 April 2010 (BST)

If this was implemented, I would stock up my inventory half full with these, and half full with bottles of wine. Then, for the next month, I'd play non-stop, Using the extra AP from this healing the 1HP cost.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 00:28, 18 April 2010 (BST)

00:34, 18 April 2010 (BST)

You might want to image ark that somewhere. :/ --Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 00:36, 18 April 2010 (BST)

Done. Ain't nobody deleting mah Belushi. 00:49, 18 April 2010 (BST)

Dupe --Explodey 00:35, 22 April 2010 (BST)

No. This suggestion adds up to an increased ability to store AP for later use, but only for those who play at least part of their time as a survivor. More AP for survivors, less for dedicated zombies -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 09:33 22 April 2010 (BST)

Ridiculously overpowered. Consume 5, use a FAK, and you still have 4 AP left to use. Also tilts things too much in favor of survivors. Q. JuliusTBH 21:29, 22 April 2010 (BST)

---

Serum Scentsativity

Timestamp:  Swiers 16:28, 17 April 2010 (BST)

Type: zombie skill

Scope: zombies

Description: A scent-tree skill directly under Scent Fear that allows zombies to pick up the scent of Necrotech facilities, allowing them to see them on the map as if they had NecroTech Employment. Skill would allow zombies that buy Brain Rot early in their career to be fully equal to level 43 zombies. Would be a trans-mortal skill (mainly to make coding easier, as it could use the same code as NecroTech Employment); if revived, the character could still identify NecroTech buildings, but would NOT be able to revive zombies or use a DNA scanner.

Discussion (Serum Scentsativity)

I was considering making this a sub-skill to Brain Rot, since its mostly for use by rotters, but Scent makes more sense, and there's no reason to NOT put it there, that I can see.  Swiers 16:29, 17 April 2010 (BST)

There was something similar mentioned here maybe two weeks ago. I had suggested that it label NTs on the map and replace NecroTech Employment's flavour text with something scent-based, such as "You are standing outside the Muller Building. A harsh chemical smell hangs in the air." I'd be all over it being added. 16:34, 17 April 2010 (BST)

I think this is a dupe of something Iscariot suggested a while back, but under a different tree.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 16:39, 17 April 2010 (BST)

Here's the link.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 00:18, 18 April 2010 (BST)

My time machine works, it's 2009 all over again. Time to place bets on Brawn and Button! -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 18:20, 17 April 2010 (BST)

I like this idea, maybe the zombies have evolved to be able to smell that "funny smell" coming from the NT buildings and thus it would be either shown on the death map, or it would be worded in the description box. --Dirty 23:55, 17 April 2010 (BST)

I'd support it, navigation ability should be equal for both sides. - User:Whitehouse 00:12, 18 April 2010 (BST)

It should, but it does look like an exact dupe of Suggestion:20090201_Scent_Enemy. Anyhow, its such a minor tweak (very few zombies don't get the chance to buy NTE) that it's probably not worth voting on again.  Swiers 03:01, 18 April 2010 (BST)

Just copy over this discussion to the talk page of the older suggestion. If it's picked up, Kevan can take this skill tree location into account -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 09:41 22 April 2010 (BST)

I like it. Zombies would definitely be able to sniff out NT buildings after spending so long in the city. Q. JuliusTBH 21:29, 22 April 2010 (BST)

---

FAK'S as Weapon's

Timestamp: User:Scvideoking 22:42, 15 April 2010 (BST)

Type: skill

Scope: Survivors.

Description:This would be a skill that allows you to actually use a FAK as a weapon I know this sounds crazy but hear me out.A FAK is common so this would basicly give 2 damage with a 10% chance of hit And other skills like melee proficency will also help attack percentage by the same amount they do general wepons. This would not cause DSR and pretty resonable and after about 15 succeful hits the kit would break. The KIT not anything inside it What do you think?--scvideoking Discussion (FAKs as Weapons) What I think is that you are not Swiers. 22:48, 15 April 2010 (BST) I no im srry i copied teh layout from him and forgot to remove that —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Scvideoking (talk • contribs) at an unknown time. You shouldn't copy it. You should follow the instructions at the top of the page instead. —Aichon— 01:22, 16 April 2010 (BST) A down-powered dupe of knife, which (if found in an Infirmary) can be described as "a large scalpel".  Swiers 01:01, 16 April 2010 (BST) Are you going to poke me in the eye with it? Its a med kit, have you ever seen a basic med kit? Your better putting a band aid over my eye then actually hurting me with one. --    Timmah!     Talk   01:03, 16 April 2010 (BST) Yes I've seen one and you could beat the hell out of someone with them but they would probly break —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Scvideoking (talk • contribs) at an unknown time. Most are made of either cloth or plastic. You'd be better of using the scissors. --VVV RPMBG 06:24, 16 April 2010 (BST) Those safety pins they use to fasten bandages could be dangerous in the wrong hands... Chief Seagull squawk don't mess with the Seagull! 10:30, 16 April 2010 (BST) Yeah sure, you can have FAKs as weapons. Provided of course that my death cultist gets to use empty syringes as weapons, air in the blood stream and the survivor in question drops dead of a brain embolism some time in the next 50AP. Obviously these can't be fixed with FAKs and it doesn't work on zombies. Sound fair to you? -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 10:40, 16 April 2010 (BST) I (as a death-cultist player) totally want those empty syringes. Now that would finally balance the AP race between reviving and killing. --Spiderzed 13:13, 16 April 2010 (BST) In all seriousness.... I would probably vouch for something along these lines, especially if the survivor side needed to take a new skill to avoid it and even that didn't work in the most important building! --Honestmistake 14:18, 16 April 2010 (BST) In Half Life, you hit someone with a FAK, don't you heal them? This would be much better. Would add flavour to ye olde healing system. DDR hit you. It healed 10 Damage. --         13:22, 16 April 2010 (BST) this is intresting, maybe if your infected and you use a fak on another survior it infects them? that could possibly be game breaking though.--Dirty 21:54, 16 April 2010 (BST) i just relized how dumb my idea was--Dirty 21:56, 16 April 2010 (BST) In L4D, you can kill infected with a medkit. That is because you have to "hold" items and if attacked you can swing it as a weapon. That doesn't work in Urban Dead because you don't "hold" items. And, even if you DID, I don't see a medikit doing more damage than a newspaper. And 15 hits is too much.--Pesatyel 17:38, 18 April 2010 (BST) Metal box + Head = bad day--Arthur Dent BIN LADEN IS DEAD!!!!! 14:38, 20 April 2010 (BST) Sure, as long as you break all the containers inside the FAK on the first swing and the next time you try to use that FAK you stab yourself on a broken bottle of xylaject (Large wildlife Tranq) and go limp and drooling for the next 6 hours. -Devorac 15:57, 21 April 2010 (BST) Scouting skill Timestamp:  Swiers 15:55, 15 April 2010 (BST) Type: skill, survivor Scope: Improves binocular use, at the cost of using more AP and not granting quite as much info. Description: The Scouting Skill would provide a new action when using binoculars. Instead of the simple 1 AP use, you'd get a 3 AP option to view a 5x5 area centered 3 squares N/S/E/W. The view of this 5x5 area would look a bit like the Necronet Report, except that it would indicate aproximate numbers (indicated as "5+/0+", with the number being 50%-100% of the actual outdoor presence) of both survivors and zombies, as well as powered and ruined buildings. The intent of this skill is to give experienced survivors an information gathering skill on par with Scent Death. If its to powerful, I was thinking it might ONLY work in buildings that have cell tower masts, as Cell Towers are positioned so as to maximize altitude / LOS. This would have the added benefit of making cell masts more relevant to the game, as currently they only play a role in cell phone use, which is pretty pointless. Discussion (Scouting Skill) Yes, if this went to voting, I'd work up some sort of visual representation of the "view" effect.  Swiers 15:56, 15 April 2010 (BST) I like it, but i would use the phone masts for scouting rather than any tall building, also I would kill the percents or make them like 75%-125% closely centered at 100%--V darkstar 16:10, 15 April 2010 (BST) Yeah, phone masts only seems best, after some thought. The idea on the numbering was that a skilled scout wouldn't over-count (he can tell which individuals he counted) but can't see everybody (individuals could be around corners, behind walls, etc.) Flat distribution helps make in less predictable, as seems realistic. Remember, this isn't actually an overhead view like you'd get from a chopper, and even the EMRPs are pretty vague. Oh, and I guess this should show the number of corpses, too, though I don't think binocular use currently gives that info.  Swiers 01:09, 16 April 2010 (BST) So you're expanding the current 3x3 grid to a 5x5? --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 09:03, 16 April 2010 (BST) Sounds too powerful. Also, swiers would turn it into some sort of mega binocular map and we don't want to go there.--GANG Giles Sednik CAPD 13:28, 16 April 2010 (BST) Nah, I wouldn't bother with this one, though somebody else (UDbrain / DEMon programmers) might. Scent Death works well for "full city scouting" because you can grab an entire suburb's worth of data (plus some) with one AP, and can do it from any (outdoor) location, without needing to take any precautions to stay alive. Getting equivalent coverage via scouting would cost 12 AP, and is trickier because you can't do it when dead. Also, the "Cell Tower only" limitation combines with the (relatively) small 5x5 view means there would always be "dead spots"; roughly speaking, a 3x3 patch at each of a suburb's 4 "corners", combining to make a 6x6 area where 4 burbs come together. That's 36% of the map scouting could NEVER let you see, with no building more than 3 blocks away from a "dead zone". Hard to base tactics on a map that's over 1/3 blank, and doesn't show what's practically next door. But yeah, the proposed quality of info is pretty high; it would be better info than what you can get from Necronet, with only slightly less coverage.  Swiers 22:55, 16 April 2010 (BST) I really like this idea. I would just want to see a visual so I know that you mean the same thing I'm thinking. And definitely the phone mast buildings for this skill. --Maverick Talk - OBR 404 07:00, 28 April 2010 (BST) Cannibalism Timestamp: --VVV RPMBG 07:49, 15 April 2010 (BST) Type: Skill/PKing alteration Scope: Survivors and PKers Discription: Simple: When you kill another survivor, you gain 5/10HP. This may or may or may not require a skill, which is the main thing up for debate, apart from the plausibility. It would encourage PKing, but also help point out it's perpetrators. It would add RP, strategy, and even coordination, which are all good. There would be a few feilds of thought: PKers might skip it, so they wouldn't stick out, or get it, so they don't have to worry as much about FAKing themselves. Non-PKers might get it for the same reason my rotter has surgery: just in case. If zombies break in and you're hurt while someone else is dying, you could finish them off, leaving the building filled with more total HP. But then again, others, including Bounty Hunters, might avoid it so they aren't assumed a PKer. Discussion (Cannibalism) IMHO pretty tasteless (and tasteless beyond the usual scope of the genre), and also of most use to PKers, as they rarely carry many supportive/healing items and could partially circumvent this deficite with this skill. Also, you haven't made clear yet if this heals infections. (Not every healing item does - see beer and wine.) --Spiderzed 09:32, 15 April 2010 (BST) It would not cure infections, more due to flavor and common sense than to balance. --VVV RPMBG 10:23, 15 April 2010 (BST) Re-theme it as either looting (regardless of what the victim was carrying, have a first aid kit be found and used), or as an adrenaline rush (in which case I'd reduce it to 2-3HP and have it apply to all kills made, regardless of who is or isn't alive). Then I'd be all over it like DDR on Vegemite. 12:30, 15 April 2010 (BST) It's not plausible. Eating raw human meat in an unsanitary quarantine zone is a really good way to make yourself SICKER, not a way to heal injury. Besides, zombies need a skill to gain HP by eating human flesh, and even then don't get this much of a boost (which amounts to free HPs for a PKer). So yeah, even if its a skill, violates the "no free lunch" guideline, as well as being out of genre AND implausible. If its gonna be an adrenaline rush or looting, why not have it kick in when you kill a ZOMBIE? Is that less of a rush? Don't zombies (or at least non-rotters) carry useful items most times, for when they get revived?  Swiers 15:38, 15 April 2010 (BST) You make a good point regarding the health benefits of raw flesh, but if one got an item, it would make no sense that you can't steal from someone long dead. As for adrenaline, the basis of the idea is that you only get the boost for killing survivors. It would never work if you could just kill a zombie. But other than HP, items, and AP(NO), there's not much you could want, so there's not really anywhere this idea can go. --VVV RPMBG 00:47, 16 April 2010 (BST) Make it a skill which allows survivors with digestion to use a less effective version on corpses. 1AP eating restores 2HP but has a 5% (or even 10%) chance of infecting the canibal per day the corpse has been there. It's not really overpowered and Death cultists etc are an accepted part of the game. One thing tho, you should automatically get covered in gore while doing this --Honestmistake 14:28, 16 April 2010 (BST) I was thinking that if the zombie corpse is infected the survivor should automatically be. Of course, if you go from the Zombie Survival Guide, infected flesh is poisonous. So if it doesn't kill you immediately it should do like 5 HP damage per action and can't be cured.--Pesatyel 17:33, 18 April 2010 (BST) I did think that eating infected corpses should carry a 100% chance of infection but don't like it for a few reasons, it would make this a very viable means of infection suicide but also I am not sure the server currently cares if any given corpse is infected? --Honestmistake 17:15, 19 April 2010 (BST) Well the server has to keep track of who has an infection flag when they are being revived. And I think my post was wrong. Should have been 50 HP per action....--Pesatyel 04:51, 20 April 2010 (BST) Food Timestamp: Cornholioo 15:00, 14 April 2010 (BST) Type: Survival Scope: Survivors Description: I think it will be realistic to make survivors require food to stay alive. Both can be found in buildings. You need to eat something every 350 AP you use or you will die. You need to drink something every 75 AP you use or you will die as well. Maybe differend qualities of food can be added. I know this will be a major change in the game... maybe it is best to create a differend city for this? Any suggestions? Discussion (Food) Major dupe (I don't have the time to find them at the moment, but there are probably a half-dozen or more, probably more, related to food). Also, realism is not the point. —Aichon— 15:07, 14 April 2010 (BST) Agree with Aichon on the realism bit. The main question as far as this is concerned is how it would be implemented, because if it was a case of actually having to search for food I couldn't see many people (or indeed anyone) supporting this - after all, we already have to search for ammo, syringes, FAKs, gennys and fuel cans just to keep this city running. Chief Seagull squawk don't mess with the Seagull! 15:15, 14 April 2010 (BST) Dupe of ingame. Stale candy, beer and wine. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 15:21, 14 April 2010 (BST) Why is realism not the point? This game is turnbased, but besides that it's pretty realistic I guess. --Cornholioo 15:45, 14 April 2010 (BST) Now bearing in mind, I've never been to the Netherlands, but look out your window. Count the number of living dead. If you answer is more than zero, then maybe the game is realistic. 15:47, 14 April 2010 (BST) Well I can see some! Now seriously: you could kinda call this a postapocalyptic simulation right? You probably need food then. --Cornholioo 18:47, 14 April 2010 (BST) How would this make the game better? --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 17:39, 14 April 2010 (BST) Not really 'better', it would make it more realistic. --Cornholioo 18:48, 14 April 2010 (BST) I agree with Cornholioo. Survivors should also need to go to the toilet once every ~25AP. Also, as a post-apocalyptic society would have no agriculture and ergo large populations would be systematically unsustainable, the food in the suggestion should be limited to about 20 items per supermarket, after which everyone starves to death. --Karloth Vois ¯\(°_o)/¯ 21:21, 14 April 2010 (BST) Would resorting to cannablisum stop this from occuring?--TCAPD(╯°□°)╯ ┻━┻ 21:22, 14 April 2010 (BST) Yeah, but zombie-flesh will turn you infected (you lose 1 HP every turn). --Cornholioo 17:19, 16 April 2010 (BST) I like man-meat, have it function as a regular bite attack, recover 2hp IF you've got digestion and automatic infection for the biter. That way it has limited use, (munch once then heal for +7hp), but still allows for cannibalistic death-cultists. Although I'd say make it so you could bite zombies back aswell, but you don't get health back, just infected... --Kamikazie-Bunny 03:31, 17 April 2010 (BST) Compound Bow, Quiver/Arrow Bundle Timestamp: Lucifer210 07:11, 5 April 2010 (BST) Type: Weapon Scope: Survivors Description: A new ranged weapon for survivors a bow found in schools and mall sport shops. Base 5% accuracy, with damage 4 per hit. 15 arrows a pack, 3% encumberance per bow, 2% per pack. Due to bows and arrows being quiet projectiles, people hit by arrows will not be informed who shot them, due to the lack of gun smoke and lower sound output. PS. I'm open to disregarding the added effects of fired arrows EDIT: Also thought to include skill to improve accuracy. Basic Firearms Training (Prerequisit Only) Archery Training (+10% Accuracy) Advanced Archery Training (+25% Accuracy) Discussion (Compound Bow, Quiver/Arrow Bundle) Base 5% accuracy...does it ever improve? What does the math look like for damage/AP? —Aichon— 09:11, 5 April 2010 (BST) I was under the impression that weapons and new skills had to be made under seperate suggestions --Lucifer210 04:29, 6 April 2010 (BST) Ok, time for some quick math here. Let's assume that you have one Pistol and I have one Compound Bow, and that we each are loaded up with ammo. You'll be able to make 43 Pistol shots and would have to reload 7 times with your 50 AP for the day, yielding an average of 139.75dmg against a not Rotted/Jacketed target. I, on the other hand, would be able to take 47 arrow shots and would have to reload 3 times with my 50 AP for the day, yielding an average of 183.3dmg against the same type of target. Given those numbers, you would be doing 2.795dmg/AP on average, while I would be doing 3.66dmg/AP on average. If we were to consider searches as well, the Pistol is currently the most AP-efficient weapon in the game since it has multiple shots per clip and clips are decently easy to find, and this thing absolutely blows it away, since you need less searches, yet hit for harder and have to reload less often. But to quickly show the math, it takes an average of 8 searches right now to find one clip, so we'll assume it would have taken you 64 searches to find the clips you used earlier (there was one loaded in the gun already). Likewise, if we assume 8 searches per clip of arrows/bolts, I'd need just 32 searches. So, if we add the AP we spent before onto the AP for searches, that means that you'd actually need 114 AP on average to deal 139.75dmg, for an efficiency of 1.226dmg/AP, whereas I would need just 82 AP to reach my 183.3dmg for an efficiency of 2.234dmg/AP. Basically, the Compound Bow would be the new best weapon in the game BY FAR. I could average about two kills every day with the thing, even with searches and misses taken into account. —Aichon— 21:29, 6 April 2010 (BST) In regards of search rates, you have to consider the places where the bow and the arrows pops up. In Mall Sports Stores one would need to go through a lot of fencing foils and other bummer weapons if the bow has an equal chance to pop up, while schools generally have low finding rates. (Not that this minor point helps the suggestion much as it is now.) --Spiderzed 13:19, 7 April 2010 (BST) That's why I just made some generic assumptions regarding the search rates for ease of highlighting the disparity between the weapons. There are also other issues at play, such as finding pre-loaded weapons and the like. In truth, he probably needs to provide them himself in order to make the suggestion complete anyway, but for now, I just supplied some stand-in numbers of my own. —Aichon— 15:27, 7 April 2010 (BST) (Zerging) griefers dream. Create a scout alt, get him a bow plus hundreds of arrows, find your victim and let the "fun" begin. Sure, it will prolly take some time/ap due to low accuracy but who cares? The victim has no chance of actively finding out who's targetting him so the griefer has all the time in the world.--Trevor Wrist 12:14, 5 April 2010 (BST) It can actually be done quicker. Use a pistol to weaken the target rapidly to its last HPs, and then finish the job with the bow. My bounty-sensitive death-cultist would totally do that to ensure that he doesn't get reported. And then report the victim if it dares to retaliate without covering its tracks like me. It's similar to para-chuting and even simpler to use as it doesn't rely on being infected, so expect to see a lot of that if a ninja bow gets implemented. --Spiderzed 12:23, 5 April 2010 (BST) "(Zerging) griefers dream." Hardly. Zergers don't care about their characters' safety: they just create more, and so have no need for the stealth the bow offers. Firefighter + axe would still be vastly more effective than scout + bow. As it currently stands it would take years with a starting character to get lucky enough to kill someone with a bow at 50AP/day (remember those things called FAKs that people grab when they get injured?), and if you are zerging for more AP then firefighters would work much better! And Spiderzed, most PKers enjoy taunting their victims and bystanders. Removing the risk removes the fun! I imagine this would mostly be used by Bounty Hunters and do-gooders who don't want to damage their good name. --Anotherpongo 14:37, 5 April 2010 (BST) PKers might, and PKers might also want the bragging rights of having a bounty. My death-cultist won't. He's more interested into keeping a low profile RG-wise, to a.) keep being CRed and eating syringes on RPs and b.) be able to put dumbass trenchies on the RG who are stupid enough to shoot someone for GKing, para-chuting and other lesser crimes. --Spiderzed 14:49, 5 April 2010 (BST) Is that really a problem? I think alternative playstyles should be encouraged to keep the game interesting. --Anotherpongo 15:52, 6 April 2010 (BST) Oh, don't get me wrong, as a passionate death-cultist I'd _totally_ dig a weapon that allows me to kill anonymously and taunt the victim to lure it on the RG. It's just that I can imagine enough haters who'd outcry at the prospect of that. --Spiderzed 16:28, 6 April 2010 (BST) I've done a bit of archery, and yes, bows are quiet. But even the compact compound bows make a noise when you let go, if not as loud as a gun, and it's easy to tell when someone is shooting at you, or anyone else. --Enigmatalk 14:17, 5 April 2010 (BST) A bow is however certainly more stealthy than a gun, which the suggestor is trying to reflect. --Anotherpongo 14:37, 5 April 2010 (BST) I also said I would be open to dropping the 'silent kill' part --Lucifer210 04:29, 6 April 2010 (BST) The author hasn't mentioned whether the kill message will appear, only the hit message. I suggest adding what skills would affect it. Possibly +10% from Body Building, in addition to a new line of Archery skills? I like the idea of exchanging accuracy for stealth, but you might want to add some limitations. --Anotherpongo 14:37, 5 April 2010 (BST) Originally, neither the hit or kill messages would show up, except for "you were shot for 4 damage" & "You are dead". Now I would disregard anything related to stealth. --Lucifer210 10:30, 7 April 2010 (BST) I support this idea also the sond you may hear from a bow is the string so txt could be You hear the thump of a bowsting nearby* but instead you shoud make it with 2 damage and injure the person until a FAK or remove the arrow for -3 health (the arrow will act like an infection to the zed) this would be logical and coming back from where zeds can infect you-scvideoking 17:59, 5 April 2010 (BST) If Thumping Bowstings is not already a band, it should be. 22:28, 5 April 2010 (BST) This sucks. I'm tired. That is all. Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 22:13, 5 April 2010 (BST) so you're saying that (in theory) you can hold 15 arrows to attack? at 4 damage per succesful hit at 5%, a little general math tells me that it is a bit overpowered damagewise. possibly getting rid of the advanced skill for this could balance it out a bit, and possiblt lowering the quiver size too. but still, this is a great idea, and i like it. --Jack Kolt Talk|Chars 04:53, 6 April 2010 (BST) How would firearms training affect bows? While it doesn't matter to me it might matter the the more anally retentive among us. And 6 damage at 65% accuracy makes this better than the pistol if searching for ammo is ignored, but 15 arrows per quiver is excessive. --Anotherpongo 15:59, 6 April 2010 (BST) With the invisibility, this is terribly overpowered (as stated above). Without it, you've got a 5% to hit, 4 damage weapon with 15 ammo. Assuming maxed hit% of 65%, it has more ammo than a pistol, but less damage. Not enough less damage, in my opinion.--Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 16:56, 6 April 2010 (BST) It actually does more damage. Notice the +2 damage for Advanced Archery Training. It'll do 6 to the Pistol's 5. —Aichon— 21:11, 6 April 2010 (BST) Extremely stupid. Didn't notice that. It should be about 2.--Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 21:52, 6 April 2010 (BST) Okay, so if I were to use the bow as my primary weapon and I had all skills I would now wield a weapon with an average damage per AP of 3.6 per shot, a clip size of 15, and 65% accuracy? Even without that damning overpower its encumbrance to ammunition ratio is way too low. Example: I carry a standard emergency supply kit that is roughly 10% of my total encumbrance, if I devote the remaining 90 percent to pistols and I do it for combat I will carry 4 pistols and 37 clips. That totals to about 246 shots. If I replace the pistols with one bow (with a clip size of 15 and a damage of six reloading isn't going to be a worry) and the clips with quivers I can now carry 44 quivers. 44*15=660 shots before I have to restock. Do you see the problem? -Devorac 23:07, 6 April 2010 (BST) Taking this in to extended maths, this would be easier to search for as well, because you get 15 shots from one successful search.--Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 23:11, 6 April 2010 (BST) See the math I added to my initial comment on this suggestion. This weapon is almost twice as good as the Pistol. —Aichon— 23:40, 6 April 2010 (BST) Right, since you people apparently can't let this die I suppose I'll have to deal with it. Now, form what I can see the following jumps out at me: Stealth weaponry? Why don't you just call it the death cultist special and have done with it? Maths. Aichon has made with the numbers and it's just overpowered. It's going to fail voting for this reason. Location. Where do you find these things and the ammo? I feel my response to this answer is going to begin with the letters 'D', 'S' and 'R'. Why? What's the flavour? How common are these in genre? What is the reason to spend time programming them into the game? -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 00:55, 7 April 2010 (BST) Regarding location, the suggestion description says Mall Sports Stores and Schools, so diluted search rates won't be as bad as they typically are for these new weapons. It's one of the considerations I actually like about this suggestion. —Aichon— 05:13, 7 April 2010 (BST) OK, after reading generally negative responses for my suggestion I have decided that 'Basic Firearms Training' would not affect the bow, and only be a prerequisit skill, and 10 arrows a quiver. Would someone kindly do the new math due to these changes. --Lucifer210 10:30, 7 April 2010 (BST) Might want to change the suggestion to say 10 arrows per quiver. Anyway, I'll be nice and do the math for you one last time, but you have to do it from here on. Given that it only has 10 arrows per quiver and now does 4 damage per shot, you'd be able to get in 46 shots with 4 reloads, for 73.6dmg, or 1.472dmg/AP before searches are considered. With searches considered, you would need 40AP to find the quivers, for a total of 90AP, yielding 0.817dmg/AP, making it, in my opinion, a virtually worthless weapon. It doesn't have burst damage (like the Shotgun), AP efficiency (like the Pistol), or a nice balance in between. —Aichon— 11:04, 7 April 2010 (BST) I did some archery as a youngster, and I remember having to reload my bow after every shot no matter how many arrows I had stuck in the ground (we didn't use quivers). It's not as if a quiver is like an automatic weapon's magazine where you just take one shot after another. (I accept that the 'pistols' and 'clips' of ammo in the game aren't too realistic either.) I'd also be surprised if you were to find many compound-bow style arrows in schools. (Darts, yes, but not flighted arrows.) In brief, my suggested changes would be 1) reload after every shot, 2) no arrows in schools, and 3) drop the stealth aspect - it's no fun being killed by an unknown assassin as there's no chance of getting payback (arrows are neither silent nor invisible, anyway). Encumbrance should also be more of an issue, as a full-sized compound bow and several quivers full of arrows should be no joke to tote around Malton along with your generators, fuel cans, stuffed moose heads etc.--Mallrat TSI TKS CTD 11:33, 11 April 2010 (BST) I say why not, tweak the numbers and you've got my vote, nevermind you've got it already. --Kamikazie-Bunny 03:10, 17 April 2010 (BST) Tweak the numbers, make its damage/ap ratio fall between a shotgun and a pistol, and you have my vote. The Village Mormon 23:08, 23 April 2010 (BST) Suggestions up for voting None at this time.